The image may not tell the real story

[Nicole]

Originally Posted by Christa

At least in those photos the story is true. I hate it when the pictures are manipulated to tell a tale that wasn't there in the frist place. I think we have all seen these reports of how photographers used fraud to get a message across. ... On a side note, I am not saying I don't think pictures shouldn't be edited to enhance or clarify.

*bump*

There was another incident involving a newspaper photographer photoshopping an image: "Detrich Resigns from Blade". Is it more or less fraudulent where the editing doesn't change anything material about the picture / story? Personally, I'm torn because allowing editing in a newspaper photo is a very slippery slope, but here, it just doesn't seem like it changes anything by removing the legs behind the banner... just a thought

[jiminyClickit]

Nicole,

Tried this some hours ago, got kicked off by Server changeover.

Maybe a new position needs to be created: Photo Integrity Person, whose responsibilities would include deciding if a proposed edit would influence in any way how the event was perceived. A community panel could be polled online before any decision was final. Before and after shots from photographer would be locked in Editor's computer until press runtime.

I also remember more than a few photos being run with the "black bar" of privacy/protect-the-identity across some folks eyes/face. Was that honest, ethical? I'd take out the legs, too.

[Nicole]

Originally Posted by Nicole

There was another incident involving a newspaper photographer photoshopping an image: "Detrich Resigns from Blade". Is it more or less fraudulent where the editing doesn't change anything material about the picture / story? Personally, I'm torn because allowing editing in a newspaper photo is a very slippery slope, but here, it just doesn't seem like it changes anything by removing the legs behind the banner... just a thought

An update to this story. The photographer in question apparently altered 79 out of the 947 shots that he submitted for publication at the Toledo Blade. Of these 79, 27 were published in the paper and on the website, and another 31 were published on the website only. Two of the unpublished photos were ones where he digitally added a basketball and a hockey puck respectively. Read the full story at the Toledo Blade.

I have to say that after reading the update my opinion of the situation has most definitely changed. A one time thing where nothing material has changed is one thing, but this definitely goes further.

[jiminyClickit]

Nicole,

I wish they'd allow access to all photos in question. And what institution on earth would ever be able to find all such incidents out of the trillions of photos published worldwide. The truth as far as it can be determined should certainly be the goal. But it will always be subjective. Color strikes me as an example: whose measure of accuracy (camera, printer, or writer's description) should be accepted? If this guy had waited a minute and the jeaned individual had moved, would the issue exist (not counting his dozens of other "fixes")? Your first "slippery slope" still applies, and while it's loads of fun here to stretch the limits of an image, real-world accuracy demands that truth not be stretched. Situational ethics, food for much discussion.